John Calvin Commentary 1 Corinthians 2

And I, when I came—Paul, having begun to speak of his own method of teaching, had immediately fallen into a discussion about the nature of gospel preaching generally. He now returns to speak of himself, to show that nothing in him was despised except what belonged to the nature of the gospel itself and, in a way, adhered to it.

He therefore admits that he did not possess any of the aids of human eloquence or wisdom that would qualify him to produce any effect. But while he acknowledges himself to be lacking such resources, he hints at the conclusion to be drawn from this: that the power of God shone all the more illustriously in his ministry, because it stood in no need of such assistance. This latter idea, however, he brings forward soon after.

For now, he simply grants that he has nothing of human wisdom, and in the meantime, he maintains this much: that he published the testimony of God.

Some interpreters, indeed, explain the testimony of God in a passive sense. But as for me, I have no doubt that another interpretation is more in accordance with the Apostle’s design, so that the testimony of God is that which has come forth from God—the doctrine of the gospel, of which God is the author and witness.

He now distinguishes between speech and wisdom (λόγον ἀπὸ τῆς σοφίας). Therefore, what I previously observed is confirmed here: that until now he has not been speaking of mere empty chatter, but has included all training in human learning.

For I did not reckon it desirable. Since κρίνειν in Greek often has the same meaning as ἐκλέγειν, that is, to choose something out as precious, I think every person of sound judgment will agree that the translation I have given is a probable one, provided the construction allows for it.

At the same time, if we render it this way— “No kind of knowledge did I hold in esteem”—there will be nothing harsh in this rendering. If we understand something to be supplied, the sentence will run smoothly enough in this way— “Nothing did I value myself for, as worth knowing, or on the basis of knowledge.” At the same time, I do not entirely reject a different interpretation—viewing Paul as declaring that he esteemed nothing as knowledge, or as entitled to be called knowledge, except Christ alone.

Thus the Greek preposition ἐν would, as often happens, need to be supplied. But whether the former interpretation is accepted, or this latter one is preferred, the substance of the passage amounts to this: “As for my lacking the ornaments of speech, and lacking, too, the more elegant refinements of discourse, the reason for this was that I did not aspire to them; indeed, I despised them, because there was only one thing my heart was set on—that I might preach Christ with simplicity.”

In adding the word crucified, he does not mean that he preached nothing concerning Christ except the cross, but that, with all the abasement of the cross, he nevertheless preached Christ.

It is as if he had said: “The ignominy of the cross will not prevent me from looking up to him from whom salvation comes, or make me ashamed to regard all my wisdom as comprehended in him—in him, I say, whom proud men despise and reject on account of the reproach of the cross.”

Therefore, the statement must be explained in this way: “No kind of knowledge was, in my view, of such importance as to lead me to desire anything but Christ, crucified though he was.” This small clause is added as an amplification (αὔξησιν), in order to gall even more those arrogant teachers by whom Christ was almost despised, as they were eager to gain applause by being renowned for a superior kind of wisdom.

Here we have a beautiful passage, from which we learn what faithful ministers ought to teach, what we must learn throughout our whole lives, and in comparison with which everything else must be counted as dung (Philippians 3:8).

And I was with you in weakness. He explains at greater length what he had previously touched upon—that he had nothing shining or excellent about him in the eyes of men to raise him to distinction. He concedes, however, to his adversaries what they desired, in such a way as to make those very things which, in their opinion, tended to detract from the credibility of his ministry, result in its highest praise.

If he appeared less worthy of esteem from his being so lowly and wretched from a worldly perspective, he shows that the power of God shone out all the more conspicuously in this: that he could accomplish so much while supported by no human aid. He has in mind not merely those foolish boasters who aimed at mere show in order to gain a reputation for themselves, but also the Corinthians, who gazed with astonishment at their empty displays.

Accordingly, an account of this kind was suited to have great influence with them. They were aware that Paul had brought nothing with him from a human perspective that was suited to advance him, or that might enable him to ingratiate himself with people; and yet they had seen the amazing success which the Lord had granted to his preaching. Furthermore, they had, as it were, witnessed with their own eyes the Spirit of God present in his doctrine.

When, therefore, despising his simplicity, they were enticed by a desire for a kind of wisdom—of some unknown kind—more arrogant and more polished, and were captivated by outward appearance, indeed, even by external adornment, rather than by the living efficacy of the Spirit, did they not clearly reveal their ambitious spirit? It is with good reason, therefore, that Paul reminds them of his first entering in among them (1 Thessalonians 2:1), so that they may not draw back from that divine efficacy, which they once knew by experience.

The term weakness he employs here, and in several instances afterwards (2 Corinthians 11:30; 2 Corinthians 12:5, 9, 10), as including everything that can detract from a person’s favor and dignity in the opinion of others. Fear and trembling are the effects of that weakness. There are, however, two ways in which these two terms may be explained by us.

We may understand him to mean either that when he considered the magnitude of the office he held, he engaged in it tremblingly and not without great anxiety; or that, being surrounded by many dangers, he was in constant alarm and incessant anxiety. Either meaning suits the context sufficiently well. The second, however, is, in my opinion, the simpler one.

Such a spirit of modesty indeed befits the servants of the Lord, so that, conscious of their own weakness, and considering, on the other hand, both the difficulty and the excellence of so arduous an office, they should enter upon carrying it out with reverence and fear. For those who impose themselves confidently, and in a very prideful spirit, or who discharge the ministry of the word with an easy mind, as if they were fully equal to the task, are ignorant both of themselves and of the task.

As, however, Paul here connects fear with weakness, and as the term weakness denotes everything that could make him seem contemptible, it necessarily follows that this fear must relate to dangers and difficulties. It is certain, however, that this fear was of such a nature that it did not prevent Paul from engaging in the Lord’s work, as the facts show.

The Lord’s servants are neither so senseless as not to perceive impending dangers, nor so lacking in feeling as not to be moved by them. Furthermore, it is necessary for them to be seriously afraid mainly for two reasons:

1. First, that, humbled in their own sight, they may learn to lean and rest completely upon God alone; and
2. Secondly, that they may be trained to a complete renunciation of self.

Paul, therefore, was not without the influence of fear, but he controlled that fear in such a manner as to go forward, nevertheless, with intrepidity through the midst of dangers, so as to encounter with undaunted firmness and fortitude all the assaults of Satan and of the world; and, finally, so as to struggle through every obstacle.

And my preaching was not in the persuasive words. By the persuasive words of man’s wisdom, he means that exquisite oratory which aims and strives by artifice rather than by truth, and also an appearance of refinement that allures the minds of men. It is not without good reason, too, that he ascribes persuasiveness (τό πιθάνον) to human wisdom.

For the word of the Lord constrains us by its majesty, as if by a violent impulse, to yield obedience to it. Human wisdom, on the other hand, has her allurements, by which she insinuates herself, and her blandishments, as it were, by which she may conciliate for herself the affections of her hearers.

With this he contrasts the demonstration of the Spirit and of power, which most interpreters consider restricted to miracles; but I take it in a more general sense, as meaning the hand of God powerfully exercised in every way through the instrumentality of the Apostle. He seems to have used Spirit and power by hypallage (καθ’ ὑπαλλαγήν) to denote spiritual power, or at least in order to show by signs and effects how the presence of the Spirit had shown itself in his ministry.

He appropriately, too, uses the term ἀποδείξεως (demonstration); for such is our dullness in contemplating the works of God, that when He makes use of inferior instruments, they serve as so many veils to hide His influence from us, so that we do not clearly perceive it. On the other hand, as in the advancement given to Paul’s ministry, there was no aid provided from the flesh or the world, and as the hand of God was, as it were, made bare (Isaiah 52:10), His influence was assuredly more apparent.

That your faith should not be in the wisdom of men. To be is used here as meaning to consist. His meaning, then, is that the Corinthians derived this advantage from his having preached Christ among them without dependence on human wisdom and by relying solely on the Spirit’s influence: that their faith was founded not on men but on God.

If the Apostle’s preaching had rested exclusively on the power of eloquence, it might have been overthrown by superior eloquence; and besides, no one would pronounce that to be solid truth which rests on mere elegance of speech. It may indeed be helped by it, but it ought not to rest upon it. On the other hand, that must have been most powerful which could stand of itself without any foreign aid.

Hence it forms a choice commendation of Paul’s preaching, that heavenly influence shone forth in it so clearly that it surmounted so many hindrances, while deriving no assistance from the world. It follows, therefore, that they must not allow themselves to be moved away from his doctrine, which they acknowledge to rest on the authority of God.

Paul, however, speaks here of the faith of the Corinthians in such a way as to bring forward this as a general statement. Let it then be known by us that it is the property of faith to rest upon God alone, without depending on men; for it requires so much certainty to rely upon that it will not fail, even when assailed by all the machinations of hell, but will perseveringly endure and sustain every assault.

This cannot be accomplished unless we are fully persuaded that God has spoken to us, and that what we have believed is no mere contrivance of men. While faith ought properly to be founded on the word of God alone, there is at the same time no impropriety in adding this second prop—that believers recognize the word which they hear as having come forth from God, from the effect of its influence.